National Academies Press: OpenBook

Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research (2001)

Chapter: Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research

« Previous: 8. Conclusion and Major Recommendations
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research." National Research Council. 2001. Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10120.
×

Page 283

Appendix A

Learning from Cross-National Research

Suppose we are interested in the impact of a particular policy or treatment ‘x' on a specific outcome ‘y'. As an example we might think of y as an active health index and x as a particular diagnostic treatment, say, screening for some symptom. In any national data set we observe x, y, and a set of covariates z. The covariates z include individual and local variables (for example, age, education, local unemployment).

Ignoring, for a moment, the observable covariates, without loss of generality we may write

(1) y(i,j,t) = b(i,j,t) × (i,j,t) + u(i,j,t) for individual i, in country j and time period t

where b(i,j,t) measures the response by individual i in country j at time t to the policy intervention x. If the effect of the policy given by b(i,j,t) varies across countries and time periods, there is little to be gained from cross-country, longitudinal, cross-cohort, or repeated cross-section analyses. Thus, one of the basic hypotheses underlying a call for cross-national longitudinal data collection or cross-national analysis of repeated cross-sections is the assumption that basic behavioral responses are stable across countries and time.

Making this assumption, we rewrite equation (1) as

(2) y(i,j,t) = b(i) × (i,j,t) + u(i,j,t)

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research." National Research Council. 2001. Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10120.
×

Page 284

where b(i) is the individual response coefficient to the policy or treatment x.

An extreme version of equation (2) assumes a common response effect across all individuals, i.e., a “homogeneous effects” model. An intermediate specification might allow the response parameters to vary according to observed covariates (the z variables defined above). In general, however, the “heterogeneous effects” model of equation (2) has become the standard reference model for evaluating policy interventions.

PARAMETERS OF INTEREST

To fully understand the impact of a policy intervention or treatment ‘x' on the outcome measure ‘y', the best-case situation would be to know the full distribution of the response parameters b(i). For example, although the mean or median response may be positive, the lower quartile of the response distribution could still show a negative impact. However, we do not see the same individual with and without the treatment at the same time and in the same country. Typically, therefore, we must settle for the average effect.

A properly designed experiment measures the expected impact of the treatment on individuals drawn at random from the population. Again, this can usually be broken down into the average response for subgroups according to observed covariates ‘z'.

For nonexperimental data, a popular alternative parameter of interest is the average impact of the intervention on those who are included in the program, that is, the average treatment effect on the treated. Suppose we divide a particular group according to the observed variables z; for example, we might choose women who are between 50 and 60 years of age who live in a high-unemployment area. Among these women, let some subsample be subject to the treatment, and the average response for this subsample is the impact of the treatment on the treated.

When the treated and comparison groups are chosen randomly as in an experiment, the average treatment of the treated measures the average treatment effect. But when the treatment group occurs by self-selection or by some other nonrandom mechanism, we are simply measuring the average treatment effect among the treated. This is a much less interesting parameter but one that is used regularly in the ex-post evaluation of policy interventions.

METHODS

One simple measure of the average response parameter is to take the difference in the outcomes between the treated group and the comparison

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research." National Research Council. 2001. Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10120.
×

Page 285

group. Suppose x(i,j,t) = 1 for those who are treated and = 0 for the comparison group. Also, suppose y(1) and y(0) represent the average outcome measures for each of these groups, respectively. Then we have

(3) y(1) − y(0) = b(1) + u(1) − u(0)

Provided the bias term [u(1) − u(0)] is zero in the subpopulation, equation (3) consistently estimates the average treatment effect on the treated b(1) for this subpopulation. But how do we guarantee that this bias term is zero?

(A): If the comparison group (x(i,j,t) = 0) is chosen by randomized control, then for large enough samples, the bias term u(1) − u(0) is identically zero by design.

(B): If the bias term [u(1) − u(0)] is constant before and after the treatment, then comparing the difference in the outcome variable before the reform [y'(1) − y'(0)] with the difference after the reform [y*(1) − y*(0)] again consistently estimates b(1).

(4) [y*(1) − y*(0)] − [y'(1) − y'(0)] = b(1)

Unfortunately, the conditions for equation (4) are difficult to satisfy in a nonexperimental setting. Three conditions are required:

  • There is a sizable comparison group with similar observable characteristics.

  • The comparison group is completely unaffected by the reform.

  • The treatment group and the comparison group are subject to the exact same trends over time.

Within-Country Comparisons

Suppose all that is available are national samples. Where treatments are global for a particular subpopulation, such as the introduction of national screening (or a universal pension provision), the first condition fails immediately; no suitable comparison group exists. When there are spillover effects on the rest of the community, the second condition fails. Finally, the comparison group can be chosen within a country but the two groups are sufficiently different that they have systematically different health experiences over time, the final condition fails.

Cross-National Comparisons

Cross-national comparisons can help in all three of the above cases. Interventions or policies—for example, a universal health insurance

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research." National Research Council. 2001. Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10120.
×

Page 286

scheme—often occur in one country and not another. So even if they are global within a country, there is variation across countries. The before and after contrasts can then be drawn across countries. Alternatively different countries may introduce similar interventions or treatments but with different timings, so that the contrast in equation (4) can still be made. Second, spillover effects are typically limited to within national boundaries, so that the contrast across countries is still valid. Finally, similar comparison groups can be chosen across countries, e.g., high-income and well-educated individuals who are likely to experience the same overall trends. Note also that even where within-country variation is informative, cross-country comparisons can add substantially to the informative variability in the data, and therefore considerably improve the precision of estimates of the impact of such interventions.

Measurement Issues

The hypothesized stability of responses that allows us to move from the general but vacuous equation (1) to the stable form of equation (2) assumes that the measurements of the variables y(i,j,t) and x(i,j,t) are comparable across time and space. Again restricting attention to linear relations, the general relationship between measurements in two countries, j and j', and two time periods, t and t', may be written as

(3) x(i,j',t') = d(j,t) + c(j,t) × (i,j,t)

Substituting equation (3) into equation (1), we obtain

(4) y(i) = b(i)(d(j,t) + c(j,t)) × (i) + u(i) = d(j,t) + b(i)c(j,t)×(i) + u(i)

Ideally, if we could measure x(i,j,t) comparably across countries and time, we could assume that d = 0 and c = 1 for all j and t and thus (potentially) test the hypothesis of behavioral stability using approaches described in the preceding section (e.g., test the hypothesis that b(i,j) = b(i,j')). If we cannot make this assumption, it is easy to see that the estimated effect of x on y in country j' may differ from its estimated effect in country j even if behavior is the same in both countries, simply because the measurement of x differs (b(i) is not equal to b(i)c(j)). Failure to have comparable measures of important variables can severely reduce the possibility of exploiting cross-national variations in policies and other variables to enhance scientific knowledge of behavioral responses.

In some cases, these measurement problems are trivially easy to correct. For instance, temperature measured in Fahrenheit in the United States can be converted to centigrade to conform to European measure

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research." National Research Council. 2001. Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10120.
×

Page 287

ments. In other cases, the theoretical idea is well understood but not trivial to implement. An example is the conversion of monetary measures into a common value. Here, observed foreign exchange rates may convert francs into dollars, but this conversion may not conform to a purchasing power parity rate that could be used to equate the true purchasing power of given incomes in France and the United States. For many variables used in studies of health, psychology, and economics, methods for obtaining common measurements are not well understood, in part because they have received inadequate systematic attention from the scientific community. Progress is currently being made on a number of fronts. For example, there is a continuing large-scale, cross-national effort to create instruments that can produce valid measures of depression that are comparable across countries, cultures, and language groups. To continue making progress along these lines, the active collaboration of scientists from different disciplines and countries is imperative.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research." National Research Council. 2001. Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10120.
×

Page 288

Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research." National Research Council. 2001. Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10120.
×
Page 283
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research." National Research Council. 2001. Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10120.
×
Page 284
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research." National Research Council. 2001. Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10120.
×
Page 285
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research." National Research Council. 2001. Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10120.
×
Page 286
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research." National Research Council. 2001. Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10120.
×
Page 287
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Learning From Cross-National Research." National Research Council. 2001. Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10120.
×
Page 288
Next: Biographical Sketches of Committee Members and Staff »
Preparing for an Aging World: The Case for Cross-National Research Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $60.00 Buy Ebook | $47.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Aging is a process that encompasses virtually all aspects of life. Because the speed of population aging is accelerating, and because the data needed to study the aging process are complex and expensive to obtain, it is imperative that countries coordinate their research efforts to reap the most benefits from this important information.

Preparing for an Aging World looks at the behavioral and socioeconomic aspects of aging, and focuses on work, retirement, and pensions; wealth and savings behavior; health and disability; intergenerational transfers; and concepts of well-being. It makes recommendations for a collection of new, cross-national data on aging populations—data that will allow nations to develop policies and programs for addressing the major shifts in population age structure now occurring. These efforts, if made internationally, would advance our understanding of the aging process around the world.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!